The Sunset Argument about individuals losing their tax cuts

[Spare_change]

Shit, ss increases will be cut due to the new chained CPI index they included. Which by the way people should do some studying. Seems if the gdp doesn't grow like they think they will take from these programs to pay for tax cuts.

Indeed, Debbie.......the GDP cannot grow from the 2.5% to 6% as the orange moron predicts.......demand for goods and services will not be there since the middle class is getting about 17% of these tax cuts........

Conversely, there is a fallback position among the Paul Ryans within congress....If the GDP does not grow fast enough, THEN there will be an "argument" that social security and Medicare MUST be cut.........(but never any talk that corporations should be taxed higher.)

....

You know .... when you have a spending problem, eventually you have to address spending. Apparently, not until you've exhausted all other alternatives ....

 

[Spare_change]

All the public sees after doing their tax calculations are Oh I will pay lower taxes, I think you all better delve into this bill and talk to your accountants. Some are going to rejoice and some that are cheering for it at this moment are going to say WTF happened here.

That WTF moment won't happen until they start calculating their 2018 taxes between january 2019 and april 2019.

You're probably right, but if their accountants are worth a grain of salt they should be letting them know when they do their taxes for 2017.

Mine did ... I save about $12K .... yours?

 

[Spare_change]

And there's a whole lot of people in that boat with us. And those are the people who WILL get a tax cut. Depending on what your definition of middle class is, we're talking about the majority of tax filers.

Interesting I asked a republican poster to calculate the tax of an average long island resident, based on the median income, house value, taxes etc, and he came up with an increase of $76 dollars.

Yep --- but the primary cause of that is the ridiculous level of state taxes a New York resident pays .... when no longer allowed a full SALT deduction, their taxes may increase.

But, considering the rest of the country has been subsidizing them for 50 years, I'm guessing they shouldn't complain.

 

[Spare_change]

Future GOP talking point when the sunset approaches: "The Democrats will raise taxes on the poor."

OR.....future DEM talking point will be....
"The GOP screwed you by giving 83% of the 2017 tax cuts to their rich donors....
We will ACTUALLY lower the middle class rate for people making less than $200 K per family.......AND RAISE the tax rate on corporations who have been screwing you for the last 8 years....."

How's THAT counter argument to voters...????.

What a stupid statement --- 83% is a number generated by partisan idiots that does not reflect reality.

As for the rest, what uneducated nonsense.

 

[Slade3200]

If it does not work "we" are in trouble. The last 8 years method does not work. We may find out this country is too far gone. 30 year dumb-down takes its toll. RW will say I told ya so.....

I don't like 2.9% last minute upper bracket cut. Seems?....well I'm not in that bracket.

Why did they need to slip that in? They had corporate rate at 20%

Anwar was to get the AK vote, Murcowsky. More lard. Why do you have to bribe?

You see the Anwar project as lard??? Seriously??

I'm guessing you don't know what the Anwar project is, or you wouldn't have said something that stupid.

Of course it is pork. What does requiring the federal government to sell land leases in Alaska so energy companies can drill for oil have to do with taxes? #PorkCity

So, now that you have demonstrated that you don't even understand the definition of political pork, I'm guessing you would be best served by moving on to another subject.

No prob. I made my point

 

[Spare_change]

If it does not work "we" are in trouble. The last 8 years method does not work. We may find out this country is too far gone. 30 year dumb-down takes its toll. RW will say I told ya so.....

I don't like 2.9% last minute upper bracket cut. Seems?....well I'm not in that bracket.

Why did they need to slip that in? They had corporate rate at 20%

Anwar was to get the AK vote, Murcowsky. More lard. Why do you have to bribe?

You see the Anwar project as lard??? Seriously??

I'm guessing you don't know what the Anwar project is, or you wouldn't have said something that stupid.

Of course it is pork. What does requiring the federal government to sell land leases in Alaska so energy companies can drill for oil have to do with taxes? #PorkCity

So, now that you have demonstrated that you don't even understand the definition of political pork, I'm guessing you would be best served by moving on to another subject.

No prob. I made my point

Actually, you didn't make your point at all ... unless, of course, your goal was to demonstrate just how uninformed you actually are. Sure shot your credibility in the ass ... if I didn't know better, I'd guess you were Chuck Shumur.

 

[Slade3200]

That’s not true, there were plenty of Dems that tried to work with the republicans on this bill and they got frozen out. This could have been a bipartisan bill but it probably wouldn’t have gotten done by years end and it wouldn’t have included all the Republican pork. So they did it their way and continued the districtive practice of majority rules law making. It’s not how congress was designed to function

Sorry ---- there were none.

There were some who paid lip service to it ... but none who were sincerely interested in tax cuts.

Joe Manchin was one and claimed he could bring a dozen more

Take another look --- Manchin rallied some on-the-fence Democrats to vote against the bill. He talked a good game, but never came to play.

Democrats once seen as potential yes votes on tax cuts appear to walk away

Your right but he did that after meeting with Trump and being told he would have a seat at the table and then he worked up pages of ideas and got shut out by the republicans. After that he was a definite no, all the Dems were, the Reps were not interested in working with them it was a conscious choice

... and this happened, WHEN?

Manchin gave a series of interviews a few days ago, i'm going off what he said.

 

[Spare_change]

Sorry ---- there were none.

There were some who paid lip service to it ... but none who were sincerely interested in tax cuts.

Joe Manchin was one and claimed he could bring a dozen more

Take another look --- Manchin rallied some on-the-fence Democrats to vote against the bill. He talked a good game, but never came to play.

Democrats once seen as potential yes votes on tax cuts appear to walk away

Your right but he did that after meeting with Trump and being told he would have a seat at the table and then he worked up pages of ideas and got shut out by the republicans. After that he was a definite no, all the Dems were, the Reps were not interested in working with them it was a conscious choice

... and this happened, WHEN?

Manchin gave a series of interviews a few days ago, i'm going off what he said.

Obviously, that's your mistake ... I suggest you go back and listen to those interviews again. That is NOT what he said.

 

[Slade3200]

If it does not work "we" are in trouble. The last 8 years method does not work. We may find out this country is too far gone. 30 year dumb-down takes its toll. RW will say I told ya so.....

I don't like 2.9% last minute upper bracket cut. Seems?....well I'm not in that bracket.

Why did they need to slip that in? They had corporate rate at 20%

Anwar was to get the AK vote, Murcowsky. More lard. Why do you have to bribe?

You see the Anwar project as lard??? Seriously??

I'm guessing you don't know what the Anwar project is, or you wouldn't have said something that stupid.

Of course it is pork. What does requiring the federal government to sell land leases in Alaska so energy companies can drill for oil have to do with taxes? #PorkCity

So, now that you have demonstrated that you don't even understand the definition of political pork, I'm guessing you would be best served by moving on to another subject.

No prob. I made my point

Actually, you didn't make your point at all ... unless, of course, your goal was to demonstrate just how uninformed you actually are. Sure shot your credibility in the ass ... if I didn't know better, I'd guess you were Chuck Shumur.

And thats the second post you've made without making an counter argument. If you are going to call me wrong then make an argument why, otherwise your essentially saying nothing.

 

[Slade3200]

Joe Manchin was one and claimed he could bring a dozen more

Take another look --- Manchin rallied some on-the-fence Democrats to vote against the bill. He talked a good game, but never came to play.

Democrats once seen as potential yes votes on tax cuts appear to walk away

Your right but he did that after meeting with Trump and being told he would have a seat at the table and then he worked up pages of ideas and got shut out by the republicans. After that he was a definite no, all the Dems were, the Reps were not interested in working with them it was a conscious choice

... and this happened, WHEN?

Manchin gave a series of interviews a few days ago, i'm going off what he said.

Obviously, that's your mistake ... I suggest you go back and listen to those interviews again. That is NOT what he said.

Thats exactly what he said, He brought his pages of notes. I think it was on New Day

 

[Muhammed]

I guess I do not understand the Dem's point of view here, I see no reason why a tax cut or tax hike should not be temporary since times and circumstances can change. Maybe those cuts won't be needed down the road. What s the Dem's logic here, what is their beef?

The sunset of the working class tax cuts ensure that they will be a MAJOR issue in the 2024 elections.

The DNC knows damn well that they will get destroyed in the 2024 election if they have to run on a platform that does not include an extension of the Trump working class tax cuts.

In 2024 Ivanka will whoop the hell out of the DNC's candidate in a landslide.

 

[nat4900]

So - the short answer is: you can thank Democratic intransigence, and their desire for everybody to pay more taxes.

Moron........Where did current democrats advocate for "more taxes"???

 

[nat4900]

In 2024 Ivanka will whoop the hell out of the DNC's candidate in a landslide.

Did you forget to include the part about Papa Bear wondering what happened to his porridge?.....LOL

 

[JakeStarkey]

The GOP screwed you by giving 83% of the 2017 tax cuts to their rich donors....
We will ACTUALLY lower the middle class rate for people making less than $200 K per family.......AND RAISE the tax rate on corporations who have been screwing you for the last 8 years....."

How's THAT counter argument to voters...????.

"Blah blah BLAH..The dems are flapping those lips but they intend to raise your taxes if elected. Don't let them do it."

So you know your argument is punked by nat, so you blah blah blah because you can't answer it.

 

[Deno]

 

[Spare_change]

You see the Anwar project as lard??? Seriously??

I'm guessing you don't know what the Anwar project is, or you wouldn't have said something that stupid.

Of course it is pork. What does requiring the federal government to sell land leases in Alaska so energy companies can drill for oil have to do with taxes? #PorkCity

So, now that you have demonstrated that you don't even understand the definition of political pork, I'm guessing you would be best served by moving on to another subject.

No prob. I made my point

Actually, you didn't make your point at all ... unless, of course, your goal was to demonstrate just how uninformed you actually are. Sure shot your credibility in the ass ... if I didn't know better, I'd guess you were Chuck Shumur.

And thats the second post you've made without making an counter argument. If you are going to call me wrong then make an argument why, otherwise your essentially saying nothing.

You see the Anwar project as lard??? Seriously??

I'm guessing you don't know what the Anwar project is, or you wouldn't have said something that stupid.

Of course it is pork. What does requiring the federal government to sell land leases in Alaska so energy companies can drill for oil have to do with taxes? #PorkCity

So, now that you have demonstrated that you don't even understand the definition of political pork, I'm guessing you would be best served by moving on to another subject.

No prob. I made my point

Actually, you didn't make your point at all ... unless, of course, your goal was to demonstrate just how uninformed you actually are. Sure shot your credibility in the ass ... if I didn't know better, I'd guess you were Chuck Shumur.

And thats the second post you've made without making an counter argument. If you are going to call me wrong then make an argument why, otherwise your essentially saying nothing.

Actually, if you followed the trail ... I pointed out where you were wrong, and then you said, "no prob ... I made my point", as if that were some kind of rationalization for intentionally attempting to misinform the reader. Opening ANWAR to drilling does NOT fit the definition of political pork.

So, once again, you demonstrate just exactly how uninformed you truly are.

 

[Spare_change]

So - the short answer is: you can thank Democratic intransigence, and their desire for everybody to pay more taxes.

Moron........Where did current democrats advocate for "more taxes"???

... by refusing to support tax cuts, they have positioned themselves to have to support the tax increase in 2024. By not supporting the tax cuts, by not even participating in the discussions about tax cuts, they demonstrated that they want you to pay MORE taxes than the Republicans.

 

[Slade3200]

Of course it is pork. What does requiring the federal government to sell land leases in Alaska so energy companies can drill for oil have to do with taxes? #PorkCity

So, now that you have demonstrated that you don't even understand the definition of political pork, I'm guessing you would be best served by moving on to another subject.

No prob. I made my point

Actually, you didn't make your point at all ... unless, of course, your goal was to demonstrate just how uninformed you actually are. Sure shot your credibility in the ass ... if I didn't know better, I'd guess you were Chuck Shumur.

And thats the second post you've made without making an counter argument. If you are going to call me wrong then make an argument why, otherwise your essentially saying nothing.

Of course it is pork. What does requiring the federal government to sell land leases in Alaska so energy companies can drill for oil have to do with taxes? #PorkCity

So, now that you have demonstrated that you don't even understand the definition of political pork, I'm guessing you would be best served by moving on to another subject.

No prob. I made my point

Actually, you didn't make your point at all ... unless, of course, your goal was to demonstrate just how uninformed you actually are. Sure shot your credibility in the ass ... if I didn't know better, I'd guess you were Chuck Shumur.

And thats the second post you've made without making an counter argument. If you are going to call me wrong then make an argument why, otherwise your essentially saying nothing.

Actually, if you followed the trail ... I pointed out where you were wrong, and then you said, "no prob ... I made my point", as if that were some kind of rationalization for intentionally attempting to misinform the reader. Opening ANWAR to drilling does NOT fit the definition of political pork.

So, once again, you demonstrate just exactly how uninformed you truly are.

Saying that something is wrong is not the same as explaining why it is wrong. If you want me to respond or respect your argument then make an argument.

Also, I'm not interested in playing little word games with you. Yes "Pork" is a term used when legislators slip in language to benefit their local districts. I am applying that same principle to my critique to the tax bill that stuffed the bill with provisions that benefited the Right wing ideology because they had the majority votes. If you want to call it something different or if there is a term for what i'm speaking to that i'm not aware, other than "pork" then make me aware, but don't distract from my point to play word games, thats lazy and petty.

 

[task0778]

So - the short answer is: you can thank Democratic intransigence, and their desire for everybody to pay more taxes.

Moron........Where did current democrats advocate for "more taxes"???

... by refusing to support tax cuts, they have positioned themselves to have to support the tax increase in 2024. By not supporting the tax cuts, by not even participating in the discussions about tax cuts, they demonstrated that they want you to pay MORE taxes than the Republicans.

I think the Dems will want the tax cuts to expire on the rich guys but not the rest of us. Just like the last time with the bush tax cuts. Whether or not that happens probably depends on who has control of congress and who is in the WH.